On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 21:35, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 19:41, Benjamin Peterson <benja...@python.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> As we prepare to merge the io-c branch, the question has come up [1] >>>> about the original Python implementation. Should it just be deleted in >>>> favor C version? The wish to maintain the two implementations together >>>> has been raised on the basis that Python is easier to experiment on >>>> and read (for other vm implementors). >>>> >>> Probably not a surprise, but +1 from me for keeping the pure Python >>> version >>> around for the benefit of other VMs as well as a reference >>> implementation. >>> >> >> You have been practice channeling me again, haven't you? I like the >> idea of having two (closely matching) implementations very much. In >> 2.x we did this on an ad-hoc basis, e.g. [c]StringIO, pickle/cPickle, >> heapq/_heapq. In 3.0 we've moved towards standardizing the approach -- >> the foo.py file first defines everything and then tries to import * >> from _foo on top of that. >> > > > Currently, if I want to verify that (say) cFoo and Foo do the same thing, > or compare their speed, it's easy because I can import the modules > separately. Given the 3.0 approach, how would one access the Python versions > without black magic or hacks? As of right now there is no standard practice, although coming up with a standard way of handling this would probably be a good thing as this will also help with the testing story. -Brett
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
